TO THE MOST

HIGH AND MIGHTIE

PRINCE, JAMES BY THE GRACE OF GOD

KING OF GREAT BRITAIN, FRANCE, AND IRELAND,

DEFENDER OF THE FAITH, &c.

THE TRANSLATORS OF THE BIBLE

wish Grace, Mercy and Peace, through JESUS CHRIST, our Lord.

G R E A T and manifold were the blessings, most dread Sovereign, which Almighty G OD,the Father
of all mercies, bestowed upon us the people of ENGLAND, when first he sent Your Majesty's Royal
Person to rule and reign over us. For whereas it was the expectation of many, who wished not well unto
our SION, that upon the setting of that bright Occidental Star, Queen ELIZABETH of most happy
memory, some thick and palpable clouds of darkness would so have overshadowed this Land, that men
should have been in doubt which way they were to walk; and that it should hardly be known, who was to
direct the unsettled State; the appearance of your MAJESTY, as the Sun in his strength, instantly dispelled
those supposed and surmised mists, and gave unto all that were well affected exceeding cause of
comfort; especially when we beheld the Government established in Your HIGHNESS, and Your hopeful
Seed, by an undoubted Title, and this also accompanied with peace and tranquillity at home and abroad.

But among all our joys, there was no one that more filled our hearts, than the blessed continuance of the
preaching of God's sacred Word among us; which is that inestimable treasure, which excelleth all the
riches of the earth; because the fruit thereof extendeth itself, not only to the time spent in this transitory
world, but directeth and disposeth men unto that eternal happiness which is above in heaven.

Then not to suffer this to fall to the ground, but rather to take it up, and to continue it in that state,
wherein the famous Predecessor of Your Highness did leave it: nay, to go forward with the confidence
and resolution of a Man in maintaining the truth of CHRIST, and propagating it far and near, is that which
hath so bound and firmly knit the hearts of all Your MAJESTY'S loyal and religious people unto You, that
Your very name is precious among them: their eye doth behold You with comfort, and they bless You in
their hearts, as that sanctified Person who, under God, is the immediate Author of their true happiness.
And this their contentment doth not diminish or decay, but every day increaseth and taketh strength,
when they observe, that the zeal of Your Majesty toward the house of God doth not slack or go
backward, but is more and more kindled, manifesting itself abroad in the farthest parts of Christendom,
by writing in defence of the Truth, (which hath given such a blow unto that man of sin, as will not be
healed,) and every day at home, by religious and learned discourse, by frequenting the house of God, by
hearing the Word preached, by cherishing the Teachers thereof, by caring for the Church, as a most
tender and loving nursing Father.
There are infinite arguments of this right Christian and religious affection in Your MAJESTY; but none is
more forcible to declare it to others than the vehement and perpetuated desire of accomplishing and
publishing of this work, which now with all humility we present unto Your Majesty. For when Your
Highness had once out of deep judgment apprehended how convenient it was, that out of the Original
Sacred Tongues, together with comparing of the labours, both in our own, and other foreign Languages,
of many worthy men who went before us, there should be one more exact Translation of the holy
Scriptures into the English Tongue; Your MAJESTY did never desist to urge and to excite those to whom
it was commended, that the work might be hastened, and that the business might be expedited in so
decent a manner, as a matter of such importance might justly require.

And now at last, by the Mercy of God, and the continuance of our Labours, it being brought unto such a
conclusion, as that we have great hopes that the Church of England shall reap good fruit thereby; we
hold it our duty to offer it to Your Majesty, not only as to our King and Sovereign, but as to the principal
Mover and Author of the work: humbly craving of Your most Sacred Majesty, that since things of this
quality have ever been subject to the censures of ill meaning and discontented persons, it may receive
approbation and Patronage from so learned and judicious a Prince as Your Highness is, whose allowance
and acceptance of our labours shall more honour and encourage us, than all the calumniations and hard
interpretations of other men shall dismay us. So that if, on the one side, we shall be traduced by Popish
Persons at home or abroad, who therefore will malign us, because we are poor Instruments to make
GOD'S holy Truth to be yet more and more known unto the people, whom they desire still to keep in
ignorance and darkness; or if, on the other side, we shall be maligned by self-conceited Brethren, who
run their own ways, and give liking unto nothing, but what is framed by themselves, and hammered on
their Anvil; we may rest secure, supported within by truth and innocency of a good conscience, having
walked the ways of simplicity and integrity, as before the Lord; and sustained without by the powerful
protection of Your Majesty's grace and favour, which will ever give countenance to honest and Christian
endeavours against bitter censures and uncharitable imputations.

The LORD of Heaven and earth bless Your Majesty with many and happy days, that, as his Heavenly
hand hath enriched your Highness with many singular and extraordinary Graces, so You may be the
wonder of the world in this latter age for happiness and true felicity, to the honour of that Great GOD,
and the good of his Church, through Jesus Christ our Lord and only Saviour.
 THE TRANSLATORS TO THE READER.
Preface to the King James Version 1611
(Not Copyrighted)

THE BEST THINGS HAVE BEEN CALUMNIATED

Zeal to promote the common good, whether it be by devising anything ourselves, or revising that which
hath been laboured by others, deserveth certainly much respect and esteem, but yet findeth but cold
entertainment in the world. It is welcomed with suspicion instead of love, and with emulation instead of
thanks: and if there be any hole left for cavil to enter, (and cavil, if it do not find a hole, will make one)
it is sure to be misconstrued, and in danger to be condemned. This will easily be granted by as many as
know story, or have any experience. For, was there ever any projected, that savoured any way of
newness or renewing, but the same endured many a storm of gainsaying, or opposition? A man would
think that Civility, wholesome Laws, learning and eloquence, Synods, and Church-maintenance, (that
we speak of no more things of this kind) should be as safe as a Sanctuary, and out of shot, as they say,
that no man would lift up the heel, no, nor dog move his tongue against the motioners of them. For by
the first, we are distinguished from brute beasts lead with sensuality; By the second, we are bridled and
restrained from outrageous behaviour, and from doing of injuries, whether by fraud or by violence; By
the third, we are enabled to inform and reform others, by the light and feeling that we have attained unto
ourselves; Briefly, by the fourth being brought together to a parley face to face, we sooner compose our
differences than by writings which are endless; And lastly, that the Church be sufficiently provided for,
is so agreeable to good reason and conscience, that those mothers are holden to be less cruel, that kill
their children as soon as they are born, than those nursing fathers and mothers (wheresoever they be)
that withdraw from them who hang upon their breasts (and upon whose breasts again themselves do
hang to receive the Spiritual and sincere milk of the word) livelihood and support fit for their estates.
Thus it is apparent, that these things which we speak of, are of most necessary use, and therefore, that
none, either without absurdity can speak against them, or without note of wickedness can spurn against
them.

Yet for all that, the learned know that certain worthy men [Anacharsis with others] have been brought to
untimely death for none other fault, but for seeking to reduce their Countrymen to good order and
discipline; and that in some Commonwealths [e.g. Locri] it was made a capital crime, once to motion the
making of a new Law for the abrogating of an old, though the same were most pernicious; And that
certain [Cato the elder], which would be counted pillars of the State, and patterns of Virtue and
Prudence, could not be brought for a long time to give way to good Letters and refined speech, but bare
themselves as averse from them, as from rocks or boxes of poison; And fourthly, that he was no babe,
but a great clerk [Gregory the Divine], that gave forth (and in writing to remain to posterity) in passion
peradventure, but yet he gave forth, that he had not seen any profit to come by any Synod, or meeting of
the Clergy, but rather the contrary; And lastly, against Church-maintenance and allowance, in such sort,
as the Ambassadors and messengers of the great King of Kings should be furnished, it is not unknown
what a fiction or fable (so it is esteemed, and for no better by the reporter himself [Nauclerus], though
superstitious) was devised; Namely, that at such a time as the professors and teachers of Christianity in
the Church of Rome, then a true Church, were liberally endowed, a voice forsooth was heard from
heaven, saying: Now is poison poured down into the Church, etc. Thus not only as oft as we speak, as
one saith, but also as oft as we do anything of note or consequence, we subject ourselves to everyone's
censure, and happy is he that is least tossed upon tongues; for utterly to escape the snatch of them it is
impossible. If any man conceit, that this is the lot and portion of the meaner sort only, and that Princes
are privileged by their high estate, he is deceived. "As the sword devoureth as well one as the other," as
it is in Samuel [2 Sam 11:25], nay as the great Commander charged his soldiers in a certain battle, to
strike at no part of the enemy, but at the face; And as the King of Syria commanded his chief Captains to
"fight neither with small nor great, save only against the King of Israel:" [1 Kings 22:31] so it is too true,
that Envy striketh most spitefully at the fairest, and at the chiefest. David was a worthy Prince, and no
man to be compared to him for his first deeds, and yet for as worthy an act as ever he did (even for
bringing back the Ark of God in solemnity) he was scorned and scoffed at by his own wife [2 Sam
6:16]. Solomon was greater than David, though not in virtue, yet in power: and by his power and
wisdom he built a Temple to the Lord, such a one as was the glory of the land of Israel, and the wonder
of the whole world. But was that his magnificence liked of by all? We doubt it. Otherwise, why do they
lay it in his son's dish, and call unto him for easing the burden, "Make", say they, "the grievous servitude
of thy father, and his sore yoke, lighter?" [1 Kings 12:4] Belike he had charged them with some levies,
and troubled them with some carriages; Hereupon they raise up a tragedy, and wish in their heart the
Temple had never been built. So hard a thing it is to please all, even when we please God best, and do
seek to approve ourselves to every ones conscience.

If we will descend to later times, we shall find many the like examples of such kind, or rather unkind
acceptance. The first Roman Emperor [C. Caesar. Plutarch] did never do a more pleasing deed to the
learned, nor more profitable to posterity, for conserving the record of times in true supputation; than
when he corrected the Calendar, and ordered the year according to the course of the Sun; and yet this
was imputed to him for novelty, and arrogance, and procured to him great obloguy. So the first
Christened Emperor [Constantine] (at the least-wise that openly professed the faith himself, and allowed
others to do the like) for strengthening the Empire at his great charges, and providing for the Church, as
he did, got for his labour the name Pupillus, as who would say, a wasteful Prince, that had need of a
Guardian or overseer [Aurel. Victor]. So the best Christened Emperor [Theodosius], for the love that he
bare unto peace, thereby to enrich both himself and his subjects, and because he did not see war but find
it, was judged to be no man at arms [Zosimus], (though indeed he excelled in feats of chivalry, and
showed so much when he was provoked) and condemned for giving himself to his ease, and to his
pleasure. To be short, the most learned Emperor of former times [Justinian], (at the least, the greatest
politician) what thanks had he for cutting off the superfluities of the laws, and digesting them into some
order and method? This, that he had been blotted by some to be an Epitomist, that is, one that
extinguishes worthy whole volumes, to bring his abridgments into request. This is the measure that hath
been rendered to excellent Princes in former times, even, Cum bene facerent, male audire, For their good
deeds to be evil spoken of. Neither is there any likelihood, that envy and malignity died, and were buried
with the ancient. No, no, the reproof of Moses taketh hold of most ages; "You are risen up in your
fathers' stead, and increase of sinful men." [Num 32:14] "What is that that hath been done? that which
shall be done; and there is no new thing under the Sun," saith the wiseman: [Ecc 1:9] and S. Stephen,
"As your fathers did, so do you." [Acts 7:51]
 HIS MAJESTY'S CONSTANCY, NOTWITHSTANDING CALUMNIATION,
FOR THE SURVEY OF THE ENGLISH TRANSLATIONS

This, and more to this purpose, His Majesty that now reigneth (and long, and long may he reign, and
hisoffspring forever, "Himself and children, and children's always) knew full well, according to the
singular wisdom given unto him by God, and the rare learning and experience that he hath attained unto;
namelythat whosoever attempteth anything for the public (especially if it pertain to Religion, and to the
opening and clearing of the word of God) the same setteth himself upon a stage to be gloated upon by
every evil eye, yea, he casteth himself headlong upon pikes, to be gored by every sharp tongue. For he
that medleth with men's Religion in any part, medleth with their custom, nay, with their freehold; and
though they find no content in that which they have, yet they cannot abide to hear of altering.
Notwithstanding his Royal heart was not daunted or discouraged for this that colour, but stood resolute,
"as a statue immovable, and an anvil not easy to be beaten into plates," as one [Suidas] saith; he knew
who had chosen him to be a Soldier, or rather a Captain, and being assured that the course which he
intended made for the glory of God, and the building up of his Church, he would not suffer it to be
broken off for whatsoever speeches or practices. It doth certainly belong unto Kings, yea, it doth
specially belong unto them, to have care of Religion, yea, it doth specially belong unto them, to have
care of Religion, yea, to know it aright, yea, to profess it zealously, yea to promote it to the uttermost of
their power. This is their glory before all nations which mean well, and this will bring unto them a far
most excellent weight of glory in the day of the Lord Jesus. For the Scripture saith not in vain, "Them
that honor me, I will honor," [1 Sam 2:30] neither was it a vain word that Eusebius delivered long ago,
that piety towards God was the weapon and the only weapon, that both preserved Constantine's person,
and avenged him of his enemies [Eusebius lib 10 cap 8].
 THE PRAISE OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES

But now what piety without truth? what truth (what saving truth) without the word of God? What word
of God (whereof we may be sure) without the Scripture? The Scriptures we are commanded to search.
John 5:39. Isa 8:20. They are commended that searched and studied them. Acts 8:28-29, 17:11. They are
reproved that were unskilful in them, or slow to believe them. Matt 22:29. Luke 24:25. They can make
us wise unto salvation. 2 Tim 3:15. If we be ignorant, they will instruct us; if out of the way, they will
bring us home; if out of order, they will reform us; if in heaviness, comfort us; if dull, quicken us; if
cold, inflame us. Tolle, lege; Tolle, lege, Take up and read, take up and read the Scriptures [S. August.
confess. lib 8 cap 12], (for unto them was the direction) it was said unto S. Augustine by a supernatural
voice. "Whatsoever is in the Scriptures, believe me," saith the same S. Augustine, "is high and divine;
there is verily truth, and a doctrine most fit for the refreshing of men's minds, and truly so tempered, that
everyone may draw from thence that which is sufficient for him, if he come to draw with a devout and
pious mind, as true Religion requireth." [S. August. de utilit. credendi cap. 6] Thus S. Augustine. and S.
Jerome: "Ama scripturas, et amabit te sapientia etc." [S. Jerome. ad Demetriad] Love the Scriptures, and
wisdom will love thee. And S. Cyril against Julian; "Even boys that are bred up in the Scriptures,
become most religious, etc." [S. Cyril. 7 contra Iulianum] But what mention we three or four uses of the
Scripture, whereas whatsoever is to be believed or practiced, or hoped for, is contained in them? or three
or four sentences of the Fathers, since whosoever is worthy the name of a Father, from Christ's time
downward, hath likewise written not only of the riches, but also of the perfection of the Scripture? "I
adore the fulness of the Scripture," saith Tertullian against Hermogenes. [Tertul. advers. Hermo.] And
again, to Apelles an heretic of the like stamp, he saith; "I do not admit that which thou bringest in (or
concludest) of thine own (head or store, de tuo) without Scripture." [Tertul. de carne Christi.] So Saint
Justin Martyr before him; "We must know by all means," saith he, "that it is not lawful (or possible) to
learn (anything) of God or of right piety, save only out of the Prophets, who teach us by divine
inspiration." So Saint Basil after Tertullian, "It is a manifest falling way from the Faith, and a fault of
presumption, either to reject any of those things that are written, or to bring in (upon the head of them)
any of those things that are not written. We omit to cite to the same effect, S. Cyril B. of Jerusalem in his
4::Cataches., Saint Jerome against Helvidius, Saint Augustine in his 3::book against the letters of
Petilian, and in very many other places of his works. Also we forebear to descend to later Fathers,
because we will not weary the reader. The Scriptures then being acknowledged to be so full and so
perfect, how can we excuse ourselves of negligence, if we do not study them, of curiosity, if we be not
content with them? Men talk much of [an olive bow wrapped about with wood, whereupon did hang
figs, and bread, honey in a pot, and oil], how many sweet and goodly things it had hanging on it; of the
Philosopher's stone, that it turned copper into gold; of Cornucopia, that it had all things necessary for
food in it, of Panaces the herb, that it was good for diseases, of Catholicon the drug, that it is instead of
all purges; of Vulcan's armor, that it was an armor of proof against all thrusts, and all blows, etc. Well,
that which they falsely or vainly attributed to these things for bodily good, we may justly and with full
measure ascribe unto the Scripture, for spiritual. It is not only an armor, but also a whole armory of
weapons, both offensive and defensive; whereby we may save ourselves and put the enemy to flight. It
is not an herb, but a tree, or rather a whole paradise of trees of life, which bring forth fruit every month,
and the fruit thereof is for meat, and the leaves for medicine. It is not a pot of Manna, or a cruse of oil,
which were for memory only, or for a meal's meat or two, but as it were a shower of heavenly bread
sufficient for a whole host, be it never so great; and as it were a whole cellar full of oil vessels; whereby
all our necessities may be provided for, and our debts discharged. In a word, it is a Panary of wholesome
food, against fenowed traditions; a Physician's shop (Saint Basil called it) [S. Basil in Psal. primum.] of
preservatives against poisoned heresies; a Pandect of profitable laws, against rebellious spirits; a
treasury of most costly jewels, against beggarly rudiments; finally a fountain of most pure water
springing up unto everlasting life. And what marvel? The original thereof being from heaven, not from
earth; the author being God, not man; the inditer, the holy spirit, not the wit of the Apostles or Prophets;
the Penmen such as were sanctified from the womb, and endued with a principal portion of God's spirit;
the matter, verity, piety, purity, uprightness; the form, God's word, God's testimony, God's oracles, the
word of truth, the word of salvation, etc.; the effects, light of understanding, stableness of persuasion,
repentance from dead works, newness of life, holiness, peace, joy in the holy Ghost; lastly, the end and
reward of the study thereof, fellowship with the Saints, participation of the heavenly nature, fruition of
an inheritance immortal, undefiled, and that never shall fade away: Happy is the man that delighted in
the Scripture, and thrice happy that meditateth in it day and night.
 TRANSLATION NECESSARY

But how shall men meditate in that, which they cannot understand? How shall they understand that
which is kept close in an unknown tongue? as it is written, "Except I know the power of the voice, I
shall be to him that speaketh, a Barbarian, and he that speaketh, shall be a Barbarian to me." [1 Cor 14]
The Apostle excepteth no tongue; not Hebrew the ancientest, not Greek the most copious, not Latin the
finest. Nature taught a natural man to confess, that all of us in those tongues which we do not
understand, are plainly deaf; we may turn the deaf ear unto them. The Scythian counted the Athenian,
whom he did not understand, barbarous; [Clem. Alex. 1 Strom.] so the Roman did the Syrian, and the
Jew (even S. Jerome himself called the Hebrew tongue barbarous, belike because it was strange to so
many) [S. Jerome. Damaso.] so the Emperor of Constantinople [Michael, Theophili fil.] calleth the Latin
tongue, barbarous, though Pope Nicolas do storm at it: [2::Tom. Concil. ex edit. Petri Crab] so the Jews
long before Christ called all other nations, Lognazim, which is little better than barbarous. Therefore as
one complaineth, that always in the Senate of Rome, there was one or other that called for an interpreter:
[Cicero 5::de finibus.] so lest the Church be driven to the like exigent, it is necessary to have translations
in a readiness. Translation it is that openeth the window, to let in the light; that breaketh the shell, that
we may eat the kernel; that putteth aside the curtain, that we may look into the most Holy place; that
removeth the cover of the well, that we may come by the water, even as Jacob rolled away the stone
from the mouth of the well, by which means the flocks of Laban were watered [Gen 29:10]. Indeed
without translation into the vulgar tongue, the unlearned are but like children at Jacob's well (which is
deep) [John 4:11] without a bucket or something to draw with; or as that person mentioned by Isaiah, to
whom when a sealed book was delivered, with this motion, "Read this, I pray thee," he was fain to make
this answer, "I cannot, for it is sealed." [Isa 29:11]

THE TRANSLATION OF THE OLD TESTAMENT OUT OF THE HEBREW INTO

GREEK

While God would be known only in Jacob, and have his Name great in Israel, and in none other place,
while the dew lay on Gideon's fleece only, and all the earth besides was dry; then for one and the same
people, which spake all of them the language of Canaan, that is, Hebrew, one and the same original in
Hebrew was sufficient. [S. August. lib 12 contra Faust c32] But, when the fulness of time drew near,
that the Sun of righteousness, the Son of God should come into the world, whom God ordained to be a
reconciliation through faith in his blood, not of the Jew only, but also of the Greek, yea, of all them that
were scattered abroad; then lo, it pleased the Lord to stir up the spirit of a Greek Prince (Greek for
descent and language) even of Ptolemy Philadelph King of Egypt, to procure the translating of the Book
of God out of Hebrew into Greek. This is the translation of the Seventy Interpreters, commonly so
called, which prepared the way for our Saviour among the Gentiles by written preaching, as Saint John
Baptist did among the Jews by vocal. For the Grecians being desirous of learning, were not wont to
suffer books of worth to lie moulding in Kings' libraries, but had many of their servants, ready scribes,
to copy them out, and so they were dispersed and made common. Again, the Greek tongue was well
known and made familiar to most inhabitants in Asia, by reason of the conquest that there the Grecians
had made, as also by the Colonies, which thither they had sent. For the same causes also it was well
understood in many places of Europe, yea, and of Africa too. Therefore the word of God being set forth
in Greek, becometh hereby like a candle set upon a candlestick, which giveth light to all that are in the
house, or like a proclamation sounded forth in the market place, which most men presently take
knowledge of; and therefore that language was fittest to contain the Scriptures, both for the first
Preachers of the Gospel to appeal unto for witness, and for the learners also of those times to make
search and trial by. It is certain, that that Translation was not so sound and so perfect, but it needed in
many places correction; and who had been so sufficient for this work as the Apostles or Apostolic men?
Yet it seemed good to the holy Ghost and to them, to take that which they found, (the same being for the
greatest part true and sufficient) rather than making a new, in that new world and green age of the
Church, to expose themselves to many exceptions and cavillations, as though they made a Translations
to serve their own turn, and therefore bearing a witness to themselves, their witness not to be regarded.
This may be supposed to be some cause, why the Translation of the Seventy was allowed to pass for
current. Notwithstanding, though it was commended generally, yet it did not fully content the learned,
no not of the Jews. For not long after Christ, Aquila fell in hand with a new Translation, and after him
Theodotion, and after him Symmachus; yea, there was a fifth and a sixth edition, the Authors whereof
were not known. [Epiphan. de mensur. et ponderibus.] These with the Seventy made up the Hexapla and
were worthily and to great purpose compiled together by Origen. Howbeit the Edition of the Seventy
went away with the credit, and therefore not only was placed in the midst by Origen (for the worth and
excellency thereof above the rest, as Epiphanius gathered) but also was used by the Greek fathers for the
ground and foundation of their Commentaries. Yea, Epiphanius above named doeth attribute so much
unto it, that he holdeth the Authors thereof not only for Interpreters, but also for Prophets in some
respect [S. August. 2::de dectrin. Christian c. 15]; and Justinian the Emperor enjoining the Jews his
subjects to use especially the Translation of the Seventy, rendreth this reason thereof, because they were
as it were enlightened with prophetical grace. Yet for all that, as the Egyptians are said of the Prophet to
be men and not God, and their horses flesh and not spirit [Isa 31:3]; so it is evident, (and Saint Jerome
affirmeth as much) [S. Jerome. de optimo genere interpret.] that the Seventy were Interpreters, they were
not Prophets; they did many things well, as learned men; but yet as men they stumbled and fell, one
while through oversight, another while through ignorance, yea, sometimes they may be noted to add to
the Original, and sometimes to take from it; which made the Apostles to leave them many times, when
they left the Hebrew, and to deliver the sense thereof according to the truth of the word, as the spirit
gave them utterance. This may suffice touching the Greek Translations of the Old Testament.

TRANSLATION OUT OF HEBREW AND GREEK INTO LATIN

There were also within a few hundred years after CHRIST, translations many into the Latin tongue: for
this tongue also was very fit to convey the Law and the Gospel by, because in those times very many
Countries of the West, yea of the South, East and North, spake or understood Latin, being made
Provinces to the Romans. But now the Latin Translations were too many to be all good, for they were
infinite (Latini Interprets nullo modo numerari possunt, saith S. Augustine.) [S. Augustin. de doctr.
Christ. lib 2 cap II]. Again they were not out of the Hebrew fountain (we speak of the Latin Translations
of the Old Testament) but out of the Greek stream, therefore the Greek being not altogether clear, the
Latin derived from it must needs be muddy. This moved S. Jerome a most learned father, and the best
linguist without controversy, of his age, or of any that went before him, to undertake the translating of
the Old Testament, out of the very fountain with that evidence of great learning, judgment, industry, and
faithfulness, that he had forever bound the Church unto him, in a debt of special remembrance and
thankfulness.

THE TRANSLATING OF THE SCRIPTURE INTO THE VULGAR TONGUES

Now though the Church were thus furnished with Greek and Latin Translations, even before the faith of
CHRIST was generally embraced in the Empire; (for the learned know that even in S. Jerome's time, the
Consul of Rome and his wife were both Ethnics, and about the same time the greatest part of the Senate
also) [S. Jerome. Marcell.Zosim] yet for all that the godly-learned were not content to have the
Scriptures in the Language which they themselves understood, Greek and Latin, (as the good Lepers
were not content to fare well themselves, but acquainted their neighbors with the store that God had
sent, that they also might provide for themselves) [2 Kings 7:9] but also for the behoof and edifying of
the unlearned which hungered and thirsted after righteousness, and had souls to be saved as well as they,
they provided Translations into the vulgar for their Countrymen, insomuch that most nations under
heaven did shortly after their conversion, hear CHRIST speaking unto them in their mother tongue, not
by the voice of their Minister only, but also by the written word translated. If any doubt hereof, he may
be satisfied by examples enough, if enough will serve the turn. First S. Jerome saith, Multarum gentium
linguis Scriptura ante translata, docet falsa esse quae addita sunt, etc. i.e. "The Scripture being translated
before in the languages of many Nations, doth show that those things that were added (by Lucian and
Hesychius) are false." [S. Jerome. praef. in 4::Evangel.] So S. Jerome in that place. The same Jerome
elsewhere affirmeth that he, the time was, had set forth the translation of the Seventy suae linguae
hominibus, i.e., for his countrymen of Dalmatia [S. Jerome. Sophronio.] Which words not only Erasmus
doth understand to purport, that S. Jerome translated the Scripture into the Dalmatian tongue, but also
Sixtus Senensis [Six. Sen. lib 4], and Alphonsus a` Castro [Alphon. lb 1 ca 23] (that we speak of no
more) men not to be excepted against by them of Rome, do ingenuously confess as much. So, S.
Chrysostom that lived in S. Jerome's time, giveth evidence with him: "The doctrine of S. John [saith he]
did not in such sort [as the Philosophers' did] vanish away: but the Syrians, Egyptians, Indians, Persians,
Ethiopians, and infinite other nations being barbarous people translated it into their [mother] tongue, and
have learned to be [true] Philosophers," he meaneth Christians. [S. Chrysost. in Johan. cap.I. hom.I.] To
this may be added Theodoret, as next unto him, both for antiquity, and for learning. His words be these,
"Every Country that is under the Sun, is full of these words (of the Apostles and Prophets) and the
Hebrew tongue [he meaneth the Scriptures in the Hebrew tongue] is turned not only into the Language
of the Grecians, but also of the Romans, and Egyptians, and Persians, and Indians, and Armenians, and
Scythians, and Sauromatians, and briefly into all the Languages that any Nation useth. [Theodor. 5.
Therapeut.] So he. In like manner, Ulfilas is reported by Paulus Diaconus and Isidor (and before them by
Sozomen) to have translated the Scriptures into the Gothic tongue: [P. Diacon. li. 12.] John Bishop of
Sevil by Vasseus, to have turned them into Arabic, about the year of our Lord 717; [Vaseus in Chron.
Hispan.] Bede by Cistertiensis, to have turned a great part of them into Saxon: Efnard by Trithemius, to
have abridged the French Psalter, as Bede had done the Hebrew, about the year 800: King Alfred by the
said Cistertiensis, to have turned the Psalter into Saxon: [Polydor. Virg. 5 histor.] Methodius by
Aventinus (printed at Ingolstadt) to have turned the Scriptures into Slavonian: [Aventin. lib. 4.] Valdo,
Bishop of Frising by Beatus Rhenanus, to have caused about that time, the Gospels to be translated into
Dutch rhythm, yet extant in the Library of Corbinian: [Circa annum 900. B. Rhenan. rerum German. lib
2.] Valdus, by divers to have turned them himself into French, about the year 1160: Charles the Fifth of
that name, surnamed the Wise, to have caused them to be turned into French, about 200 years after
Valdus his time, of which translation there be many copies yet extant, as witnesseth Beroaldus. Much
about that time, even in our King Richard the second's days, John Trevisa translated them into English,
and many English Bibles in written hand are yet to be seen with divers, translated as it is very probable,
in that age. So the Syrian translation of the New Testament is in most learned men's Libraries, of
Widminstadius his setting forth, and the Psalter in Arabic is with many, of Augustinus Nebiensis' setting
forth. So Postel affirmeth, that in his travel he saw the Gospels in the Ethiopian tongue; And Ambrose
Thesius allegeth the Pslater of the Indians, which he testifieth to have been set forth by Potken in Syrian
characters. So that, to have the Scriptures in the mother tongue is not a quaint conceit lately taken up,
either by the Lord Cromwell in England, [Thuan.] or by the Lord Radevile in Polony, or by the Lord
Ungnadius in the Emperor's dominion, but hath been thought upon, and put in practice of old, even from
the first times of the conversion of any Nation; no doubt, because it was esteemed most profitable, to
cause faith to grow in men's hearts the sooner, and to make them to be able to say with the words of the
Psalms, "As we have heard, so we have seen." [Ps 48:8]
 THE UNWILLINGNESS OF OUR CHIEF ADVERSARIES, THAT THE
SCRIPTURES SHOULD BE DIVULGED IN THE MOTHER TONGUE, ETC.

Now the Church of Rome would seem at the length to bear a motherly affection towards her children,
and to allow them the Scriptures in their mother tongue: but indeed it is a gift, not deserving to be called
a gift, an unprofitable gift: [Sophecles] they must first get a licence in writing before they may use them,
and to get that, they must approve themselves to their Confessor, that is, to be such as are, if not frozen
in the dregs, yet soured with the leaven of their superstition. Howbeit, it seemed too much to Clement
the Eighth that there should be any Licence granted to have them in the vulgar tongue, and therefore he
overruleth and frustrateth the grant of Pius the Fourth. [See the observation (set forth by Clemen. his
authority) upon the 4. rule of Pius the 4. his making in the index, lib. prohib. pag. 15. ver. 5.] So much
are they afraid of the light of the Scripture, (Lucifugae Scripturarum, as Tertulian speaketh) that they
will not trust the people with it, no not as it is set forth by their own sworn men, no not with the Licence
of their own Bishops and Inquisitors. Yea, so unwilling they are to communicate the Scriptures to the
people's understanding in any sort, that they are not ashamed to confess, that we forced them to translate
it into English against their wills. This seemeth to argue a bad cause, or a bad conscience, or both. Sure
we are, that it is not he that hath good gold, that is afraid to bring it to the touchstone, but he that hath
the counterfeit; [Tertul. de resur. carnis.] neither is it the true man that shunneth the light, but the
malefactor, lest his deeds should be reproved [John 3:20]: neither is it the plaindealing Merchant that is
unwilling to have the weights, or the meteyard brought in place, but he that useth deceit. But we will let
them alone for this fault, and return to translation.
 THE SPEECHES AND REASONS, BOTH OF OUR BRETHREN, AND OF OUR
ADVERSARIES AGAINST THIS WORK

Many men's mouths have been open a good while (and yet are not stopped) with speeches about the
Translation so long in hand, or rather perusals of Translations made before: and ask what may be the
reason, what the necessity of the employment: Hath the Church been deceived, say they, all this while?
Hath her sweet bread been mingled with leaven, here silver with dross, her wine with water, her milk
with lime? (Lacte gypsum male miscetur, saith S. Ireney,) [S. Iren. 3. lib. cap. 19.] We hoped that we
had been in the right way, that we had the Oracles of God delivered unto us, and that though all the
world had cause to be offended and to complain, yet that we had none. Hath the nurse holden out the
breast, and nothing but wind in it? Hath the bread been delivered by the fathers of the Church, and the
same proved to be lapidosus, as Seneca speaketh? What is it to handle the word of God deceitfully, if
this be not? Thus certain brethren. Also the adversaries of Judah and Jerusalem, like Sanballat in
Nehemiah, mock, as we hear, both the work and the workmen, saying; "What do these weak Jews, etc.
will they make the stones whole again out of the heaps of dust which are burnt? although they build, yet
if a fox go up, he shall even break down their stony wall." [Neh 4:3] Was their Translation good before?
Why do they now mend it? Was it not good? Why then was it obtruded to the people? Yea, why did the
Catholics (meaning Popish Romanists) always go in jeopardy, for refusing to go to hear it? Nay, if it
must be translated into English, Catholics are fittest to do it. They have learning, and they know when a
thing is well, they can manum de tabula. We will answer them both briefly: and the former, being
brethren, thus, with S. Jerome, "Damnamus veteres? Mineme, sed post priorum studia in domo Domini
quod possums laboramus." [S. Jerome. Apolog. advers. Ruffin.] That is, "Do we condemn the ancient?
In no case: but after the endeavors of them that were before us, we take the best pains we can in the
house of God." As if he said, Being provoked by the example of the learned men that lived before my
time, I have thought it my duty, to assay whether my talent in the knowledge of the tongues, may be
profitable in any measure to God's Church, lest I should seem to laboured in them in vain, and lest I
should be thought to glory in men, (although ancient,) above that which was in them. Thus S. Jerome
may be thought to speak.

A SATISFACTION TO OUR BRETHREN

And to the same effect say we, that we are so far off from condemning any of their labors that travailed
before us in this kind, either in this land or beyond sea, either in King Henry's time, or King Edward's (if
there were any translation, or correction of a translation in his time) or Queen Elizabeth's of ever
renowned memory, that we acknowledge them to have been raised up of God, for the building and
furnishing of his Church, and that they deserve to be had of us and of posterity in everlasting
remembrance. The judgment of Aristotle is worthy and well known: "If Timotheus had not been, we had
not had much sweet music; but if Phrynis [Timotheus his master] had not been, we had not had
Timotheus." Therefore blessed be they, and most honoured be their name, that break the ice, and giveth
onset upon that which helpeth forward to the saving of souls. Now what can be more available thereto,
than to deliver God's book unto God's people in a tongue which they understand? Since of a hidden
treasure, and of a fountain that is sealed, there is no profit, as Ptolemy Philadelph wrote to the Rabbins
or masters of the Jews, as witnesseth Epiphanius: [S. Epiphan. loco ante citato.] and as S. Augustine
saith; "A man had rather be with his dog than with a stranger (whose tongue is strange unto him)." [S.
Augustin. lib. 19. de civil. Dei. c. 7.] Yet for all that, as nothing is begun and perfected at the same time,
and the later thoughts are thought to be the wiser: so, if we building upon their foundation that went
before us, and being holpen by their labours, do endeavor to make that better which they left so good; no
man, we are sure, hath cause to mislike us; they, we persuade ourselves, if they were alive, would thank
us. The vintage of Abienzer, that strake the stroke: yet the gleaning of grapes of Ephraim was not to be
despised. See Judges 8:2. Joash the king of Israel did not satisfy himself, till he had smitten the ground
three times; and yet he offended the Prophet, for giving over then. [2 Kings 13:18-19] Aquila, of whom
we spake before, translated the Bible as carefully, and as skilfully as he could; and yet he thought good
to go over it again, and then it got the credit with the Jews, to be called accurately done, as Saint Jerome
witnesseth. [S. Jerome. in Ezech. cap. 3.] How many books of profane learning have been gone over
again and again, by the same translators, by others? Of one and the same book of Aristotle's Ethics, there
are extant not so few as six or seven several translations. Now if this cost may be bestowed upon the
gourd, which affordeth us a little shade, and which today flourisheth, but tomorrow is cut down; what
may we bestow, nay what ought we not to bestow upon the Vine, the fruit whereof maketh glad the
conscience of man, and the stem whereof abideth forever? And this is the word of God, which we
translate. "What is the chaff to the wheat, saith the Lord?" [Jer 23:28] Tanti vitreum, quanti verum
margaritum (saith Tertullian,) [Tertul. ad Martyr.] if a toy of glass be of that reckoning with us, how
ought we to value the true pearl? [Jerome. ad Salvin.] Therefore let no man's eye be evil, because his
Majesty's is good; neither let any be grieved, that we have a Prince that seeketh the increase of the
spiritual wealth of Israel (let Sanballats and Tobiahs do so, which therefore do bear their just reproof)
but let us rather bless God from the ground of our heart, for working this religious care in him, to have
the translations of the Bible maturely considered of and examined. For by this means it cometh to pass,
that whatsoever is sound already (and all is sound for substance, in one or other of our editions, and the
worst of ours far better than their authentic vulgar) the same will shine as gold more brightly, being
rubbed and polished; also, if anything be halting, or superfluous, or not so agreeable to the original, the
same may be corrected, and the truth set in place. And what can the King command to be done, that will
bring him more true honour than this? and wherein could they that have been set a work, approve their
duty to the King, yea their obedience to God, and love to his Saints more, than by yielding their service,
and all that is within them, for the furnishing of the work? But besides all this, they were the principal
motives of it, and therefore ought least to quarrel it: for the very Historical truth is, that upon the
importunate petitions of the Puritans, at his Majesty's coming to this Crown, the Conference at Hampton
Court having been appointed for hearing their complaints: when by force of reason they were put from
other grounds, they had recourse at the last, to this shift, that they could not with good conscience
subscribe to the Communion book, since it maintained the Bible as it was there translated, which was as
they said, a most corrupted translation. And although this was judged to be but a very poor and empty
shift; yet even hereupon did his Majesty begin to bethink himself of the good that might ensue by a new
translation, and presently after gave order for this Translation which is now presented unto thee. Thus
much to satisfy our scrupulous Brethren.

AN ANSWER TO THE IMPUTATIONS OF OUR ADVERSARIES

Now to the latter we answer; that we do not deny, nay we affirm and avow, that the very meanest
translation of the Bible in English, set forth by men of our profession, (for we have seen none of theirs
of the whole Bible as yet) containeth the word of God, nay, is the word of God. As the King's speech,
which he uttereth in Parliament, being translated into French, Dutch, Italian, and Latin, is still the King's
speech, though it be not interpreted by every Translator with the like grace, nor peradventure so fitly for
phrase, nor so expressly for sense, everywhere. For it is confessed, that things are to take their
denomination of the greater part; and a natural man could say, Verum ubi multa nitent in carmine, non
ego paucis offendor maculis, etc. [Horace.] A man may be counted a virtuous man, though he have
made many slips in his life, (else, there were none virtuous, for in many things we offend all) [James
3:2] also a comely man and lovely, though he have some warts upon his hand, yea, not only freckles
upon his face, but also scars. No cause therefore why the word translated should be denied to be the
word, or forbidden to be current, notwithstanding that some imperfections and blemishes may be noted
in the setting forth of it. For whatever was perfect under the Sun, where Apostles or Apostolic men, that
is, men endued with an extraordinary measure of God's spirit, and privileged with the privilege of
infallibility, had not their hand? The Romanists therefore in refusing to hear, and daring to burn the
Word translated, did no less than despite the spirit of grace, from whom originally it proceeded, and
whose sense and meaning, as well as man's weakness would enable, it did express. Judge by an example
or two. Plutarch writeth, that after that Rome had been burnt by the Gauls, they fell soon to build it
again: but doing it in haste, they did not cast the streets, nor proportion the houses in such comely
fashion, as had been most slightly and convenient; [Plutarch in Camillo.] was Catiline therefore an
honest man, or a good patriot, that sought to bring it to a combustion? or Nero a good Prince, that did
indeed set it on fire? So, by the story of Ezra, and the prophecy of Haggai it may be gathered, that the
Temple built by Zerubbabel after the return from Babylon, was by no means to be compared to the
former built by Solomon (for they that remembered the former, wept when they considered the latter)
[Ezra 3:12] notwithstanding, might this latter either have been abhorred and forsaken by the Jews, or
profaned by the Greeks? The like we are to think of Translations. The translation of the Seventy
dissenteth from the Original in many places, neither doth it come near it, for perspicuity, gravity,
majesty; yet which of the Apostles did condemn it? Condemn it? Nay, they used it, (as it is apparent, and
as Saint Jerome and most learned men do confess) which they would not have done, nor by their
example of using it, so grace and commend it to the Church, if it had been unworthy of the appellation
and name of the word of God. And whereas they urge for their second defence of their vilifying and
abusing of the English Bibles, or some pieces thereof, which they meet with, for that heretics (forsooth)
were the Authors of the translations, (heretics they call us by the same right that they call themselves
Catholics, both being wrong) we marvel what divinity taught them so. We are sure Tertullian was of
another mind: Ex personis probamus fidem, an ex fide personas? [Tertul. de praescript. contra haereses.]
Do we try men's faith by their persons? we should try their persons by their faith. Also S. Augustine was
of another mind: for he lighting upon certain rules made by Tychonius a Donatist, for the better
understanding of the word, was not ashamed to make use of them, yea, to insert them into his own book,
with giving commendation to them so far forth as they were worthy to be commended, as is to be seen in
S. Augustine's third book De doctrina Christiana. [S. August. 3. de doct. Christ. cap. 30.] To be short,
Origen, and the whole Church of God for certain hundred years, were of another mind: for they were so
far from treading under foot, (much more from burning) the Translation of Aquila a Proselyte, that is,
one that had turned Jew; of Symmachus, and Theodotion, both Ebionites, that is, most vile heretics, that
they joined together with the Hebrew Original, and the Translation of the Seventy (as hath been before
signified out of Epiphanius) and set them forth openly to be considered of and perused by all. But we
weary the unlearned, who need not know so much, and trouble the learned, who know it already.

Yet before we end, we must answer a third cavil and objection of theirs against us, for altering and
amending our Translations so oft; wherein truly they deal hardly, and strangely with us. For to
whomever was it imputed for a fault (by such as were wise) to go over that which he had done, and to
amend it where he saw cause? Saint Augustine was not afraid to exhort S. Jerome to a Palinodia or
recantation; [S. Aug. .] and doth even glory that he seeth his infirmities. [S. Aug. .] If we be sons of the
Truth, we must consider what it speaketh, and trample upon our own credit, yea, and upon other men's
too, if either be any way an hindrance to it. This to the cause: then to the persons we say, that of all men
they ought to be most silent in this case. For what varieties have they, and what alterations have they
made, not only of their Service books, Portesses and Breviaries, but also of their Latin Translation? The
Service book supposed to be made by S. Ambrose (Officium Ambrosianum) was a great while in special
use and request; but Pope Hadrian calling a Council with the aid of Charles the Emperor, abolished it,
yea, burnt it, and commanded the Service book of Saint Gregory universally to be used. [Durand. lib. 5.
cap. 2.] Well, Officium Gregorianum gets by this means to be in credit, but doth it continue without
change or altering? No, the very Roman Service was of two fashions, the New fashion, and the Old, (the
one used in one Church, the other in another) as is to be seen in Pamelius a Romanist, his Preface,
before Micrologus. the same Pamelius reporteth out Radulphus de Rivo, that about the year of our Lord,
1277, Pope Nicolas the Third removed out of the Churches of Rome, the more ancient books (of
Service) and brought into use the Missals of the Friers Minorites, and commanded them to be observed
there; insomuch that about an hundred years after, when the above name Radulphus happened to be at
Rome, he found all the books to be new, (of the new stamp). Neither were there this chopping and
changing in the more ancient times only, but also of late: Pius Quintus himself confesseth, that every
Bishopric almost had a peculiar kind of service, most unlike to that which others had: which moved him
to abolish all other Breviaries, though never so ancient, and privileged and published by Bishops in their
Dioceses, and to establish and ratify that only which was of his own setting forth, in the year 1568. Now
when the father of their Church, who gladly would heal the sore of the daughter of his people softly and
slightly, and make the best of it, findeth so great fault with them for their odds and jarring; we hope the
children have no great cause to vaunt of their uniformity. But the difference that appeareth between our
Translations, and our often correcting of them, is the thing that we are specially charged with; let us see
therefore whether they themselves be without fault this way, (if it be to be counted a fault, to correct)
and whether they be fit men to throw stones at us: O tandem maior parcas insane minori: they that are
less sound themselves, out not to object infirmities to others. [Horat.] If we should tell them that Valla,
Stapulensis, Erasmus, and Vives found fault with their vulgar Translation, and consequently wished the
same to be mended, or a new one to be made, they would answer peradventure, that we produced their
enemies for witnesses against them; albeit, they were in no other sort enemies, than as S. Paul was to the
Galatians, for telling them the truth [Gal 4:16]: and it were to be wished, that they had dared to tell it
them plainlier and oftener. But what will they say to this, that Pope Leo the Tenth allowed Erasmus'
Translation of the New Testament, so much different from the vulgar, by his Apostolic Letter and Bull;
that the same Leo exhorted Pagnine to translate the whole Bible, and bare whatsoever charges was
necessary for the work? [Sixtus Senens.] Surely, as the Apostle reasoneth to the Hebrews, that if the
former Law and Testament had been sufficient, there had been no need of the latter: [Heb 7:11, 8:7] so
we may say, that if the old vulgar had been at all points allowable, to small purpose had labour and
charges been undergone, about framing of a new. If they say, it was one Pope's private opinion, and that
he consulted only himself; then we are able to go further with them, and to aver, that more of their chief
men of all sorts, even their own Trent champions Paiva and Vega, and their own Inquisitors,
Hieronymus ab Oleastro, and their own Bishop Isidorus Clarius, and their own Cardinal Thomas a Vio
Caietan, do either make new Translations themselves, or follow new ones of other men's making, or note
the vulgar Interpreter for halting; none of them fear to dissent from him, nor yet to except against him.
And call they this an uniform tenor of text and judgment about the text, so many of their Worthies
disclaiming the now received conceit? Nay, we will yet come nearer the quick: doth not their Paris
edition differ from the Lovaine, and Hentenius his from them both, and yet all of them allowed by
authority? Nay, doth not Sixtus Quintus confess, that certain Catholics (he meaneth certain of his own
side) were in such an humor of translating the Scriptures into Latin, that Satan taking occasion by them,
though they thought of no such matter, did strive what he could, out of so uncertain and manifold a
variety of Translations, so to mingle all things, that nothing might seem to be left certain and firm in
them, etc.? [Sixtus 5. praefat. fixa Bibliis.] Nay, further, did not the same Sixtus ordain by an inviolable
decree, and that with the counsel and consent of his Cardinals, that the Latin edition of the old and new
Testament, which the Council of Trent would have to be authentic, is the same without controversy
which he then set forth, being diligently corrected and printed in the Printing-house of Vatican? Thus
Sixtus in his Preface before his Bible. And yet Clement the Eighth his immediate successor, published
another edition of the Bible, containing in it infinite differences from that of Sixtus, (and many of them
weighty and material) and yet this must be authentic by all means. What is to have the faith of our
glorious Lord JESUS CHRIST with Yea or Nay, if this be not? Again, what is sweet harmony and
consent, if this be? Therefore, as Demaratus of Corinth advised a great King, before he talked of the
dissensions of the Grecians, to compose his domestic broils (for at that time his Queen and his son and
heir were at deadly feud with him) so all the while that our adversaries do make so many and so various
editions themselves, and do jar so much about the worth and authority of them, they can with no show of
equity challenge us for changing and correcting.
THE PURPOSE OF THE TRANSLATORS, WITH THEIR NUMBER, FURNITURE,
CARE, ETC.

But it is high time to leave them, and to show in brief what we proposed to ourselves, and what course
we held in this our perusal and survey of the Bible. Truly (good Christian Reader) we never thought
from the beginning, that we should need to make a new Translation, nor yet to make of a bad one a good
one, (for then the imputation of Sixtus had been true in some sort, that our people had been fed with gall
of Dragons instead of wine, with whey instead of milk:) but to make a good one better, or out of many
good ones, one principal good one, not justly to be excepted against; that hath been our endeavor, that
our mark. To that purpose there were many chosen, that were greater in other men's eyes than in their
own, and that sought the truth rather than their own praise. Again, they came or were thought to come to
the work, not exercendi causa (as one saith) but exercitati, that is, learned, not to learn: For the chief
overseer and [NOTE: Greek letters omitted] under his Majesty, to whom not only we, but also our whole
Church was much bound, knew by his wisdom, which thing also Nazianzen taught so long ago, that it is
a preposterous order to teach first and to learn after, yea that [NOTE: Greek letters omitted] to learn and
practice together, is neither commendable for the workman, nor safe for the work. [Idem in Apologet.]
Therefore such were thought upon, as could say modestly with Saint Jerome, Et Hebreaeum Sermonem
ex parte didicimus, et in Latino pene ab ipsis incunabulis etc. detriti sumus. "Both we have learned the
Hebrew tongue in part, and in the Latin we have been exercised almost from our very cradle." S. Jerome
maketh no mention of the Greek tongue, wherein yet he did excel, because he translated not the old
Testament out of Greek, but out of Hebrew. And in what sort did these assemble? In the trust of their
own knowledge, or of their sharpness of wit, or deepness of judgment, as it were in an arm of flesh? At
no hand. They trusted in him that hath the key of David, opening and no man shutting; they prayed to
the Lord the Father of our Lord, to the effect that S. Augustine did; "O let thy Scriptures be my pure
delight, let me not be deceived in them, neither let me deceive by them." [S. Aug. lib. II. Confess. cap.
2.] In this confidence, and with this devotion did they assemble together; not too many, lest one should
trouble another; and yet many, lest many things haply might escape them. If you ask what they had
before them, truly it was the Hebrew text of the Old Testament, the Greek of the New. These are the two
golden pipes, or rather conduits, where-through the olive branches empty themselves into the gold. Saint
Augustine calleth them precedent, or original tongues; [S. August. 3. de doctr. c. 3. etc.] Saint Jerome,
fountains. [S. Jerome. ad Suniam et Fretel.] The same Saint Jerome affirmeth, [S. Jerome. ad Lucinium,
Dist. 9 ut veterum.] and Gratian hath not spared to put it into his Decree, That "as the credit of the old
Books" (he meaneth of the Old Testament) "is to be tried by the Hebrew Volumes, so of the New by the
Greek tongue," he meaneth by the original Greek. If truth be tried by these tongues, then whence should
a Translation be made, but out of them? These tongues therefore, the Scriptures we say in those tongues,
we set before us to translate, being the tongues wherein God was pleased to speak to his Church by the
Prophets and Apostles. Neither did we run over the work with that posting haste that the Septuagint did,
if that be true which is reported of them, that they finished it in 72 days; [Joseph. Antiq. lib. 12.] neither
were we barred or hindered from going over it again, having once done it, like S. Jerome, if that be true
which himself reporteth, that he could no sooner write anything, but presently it was caught from him,
and published, and he could not have leave to mend it: [S. Jerome. ad Pammac. pro libr. advers.
Iovinian.] neither, to be short, were we the first that fell in hand with translating the Scripture into
English, and consequently destitute of former helps, as it is written of Origen, that he was the first in a
manner, that put his hand to write Commentaries upon the Scriptures, [Sophoc. in Elect.] and therefore
no marvel, if he overshot himself many times. None of these things: the work hath not been huddled up
in 72 days, but hath cost the workmen, as light as it seemeth, the pains of twice seven times seventy two
days and more: matters of such weight and consequence are to be speeded with maturity: for in a
business of movement a man feareth not the blame of convenient slackness. [S. Chrysost. in II. Thess.
cap. 2.] Neither did we think much to consult the Translators or Commentators, Chaldee, Hebrew,
Syrian, Greek or Latin, no nor the Spanish, French, Italian, or Dutch; neither did we disdain to revise
that which we had done, and to bring back to the anvil that which we had hammered: but having and
using as great helps as were needful, and fearing no reproach for slowness, nor coveting praise for
expedition, we have at length, through the good hand of the Lord upon us, brought the work to that pass
that you see.

REASONS MOVING US TO SET DIVERSITY OF SENSES IN THE MARGIN,

WHERE THERE IS GREAT PROBABILITY FOR EACH

Some peradventure would have no variety of senses to be set in the margin, lest the authority of the
Scriptures for deciding of controversies by that show of uncertainty, should somewhat be shaken. But
we hold their judgment not to be sound in this point. For though, "whatsoever things are necessary
aremanifest," as S. Chrysostom saith, [S. Chrysost. in II. Thess. cap. 2.] and as S. Augustine, "In those
things that are plainly set down in the Scriptures, all such matters are found that concern Faith, Hope,
and Charity." [S. Aug. 2. de doctr. Christ. cap. 9.] Yet for all that it cannot be dissembled, that partly to
exercise and whet our wits, partly to wean the curious from the loathing of them for their everywhere
plainness, partly also to stir up our devotion to crave the assistance of God's spirit by prayer, and lastly,
that we might be forward to seek aid of our brethren by conference, and never scorn those that be not in
all respects so complete as they should be, being to seek in many things ourselves, it hath pleased God in
his divine providence, here and there to scatter words and sentences of that difficulty and doubtfulness,
not in doctrinal points that concern salvation, (for in such it hath been vouched that the Scriptures are
plain) but in matters of less moment, that fearfulness would better beseem us than confidence, and if we
will resolve upon modesty with S. Augustine, (though not in this same case altogether, yet upon the
same ground) Melius est debitare de occultis, quam litigare de incertis, [S. Aug li. S. de Genes. ad liter.
cap. 5.] "it is better to make doubt of those things which are secret, than to strive about those things that
are uncertain." There be many words in the Scriptures, which be never found there but once, (having
neither brother or neighbor, as the Hebrews speak) so that we cannot be holpen by conference of places.
Again, there be many rare names of certain birds, beasts and precious stones, etc. concerning the
Hebrews themselves are so divided among themselves for judgment, that they may seem to have defined
this or that, rather because they would say something, than because they were sure of that which they
said, as S. Jerome somewhere saith of the Septuagint. Now in such a case, doth not a margin do well to
admonish the Reader to seek further, and not to conclude or dogmatize upon this or that peremptorily?
For as it is a fault of incredulity, to doubt of those things that are evident: so to determine of such things
as the Spirit of God hath left (even in the judgment of the judicious) questionable, can be no less than
presumption. Therefore as S. Augustine saith, that variety of Translations is profitable for the finding out
of the sense of the Scriptures: [S. Aug. 2. de doctr. Christian. cap. 14.] so diversity of signification and
sense in the margin, where the text is no so clear, must needs do good, yea, is necessary, as we are
persuaded. We know that Sixtus Quintus expressly forbiddeth, that any variety of readings of their
vulgar edition, should be put in the margin, [Sixtus 5. praef. Bibliae.] (which though it be not altogether
the same thing to that we have in hand, yet it looketh that way) but we think he hath not all of his own
side his favorers, for this conceit. They that are wise, had rather have their judgments at liberty in
differences of readings, than to be captivated to one, when it may be the other. If they were sure that
their high Priest had all laws shut up in his breast, as Paul the Second bragged, [Plat. in Paulo secundo.]
and that he were as free from error by special privilege, as the Dictators of Rome were made by law
inviolable, it were another matter; then his word were an Oracle, his opinion a decision. But the eyes of
the world are now open, God be thanked, and have been a great while, they find that he is subject to the
same affections and infirmities that others be, that his skin is penetrable, and therefore so much as he
proveth, not as much as he claimeth, they grant and embrace.
REASONS INDUCING US NOT TO STAND CURIOUSLY UPON AN IDENTITY OF
PHRASING

Another things we think good to admonish thee of (gentle Reader) that we have not tied ourselves to an
uniformity of phrasing, or to an identity of words, as some peradventure would wish that we had done,
because they observe, that some learned men somewhere, have been as exact as they could that way.
Truly, that we might not vary from the sense of that which we had translated before, if the word
signified that same in both places (for there be some words that be not the same sense everywhere) we
were especially careful, and made a conscience, according to our duty. But, that we should express the
same notion in the same particular word; as for example, if we translate the Hebrew or Greek word once
by PURPOSE, never to call it INTENT; if one where JOURNEYING, never TRAVELING; if one
where THINK, never SUPPOSE; if one where PAIN, never ACHE; if one where JOY, never
GLADNESS, etc. Thus to mince the matter, we thought to savour more of curiosity than wisdom, and
that rather it would breed scorn in the Atheist, than bring profit to the godly Reader. For is the kingdom
of God to become words or syllables? why should we be in bondage to them if we may be free, use one
precisely when we may use another no less fit, as commodiously? A godly Father in the Primitive time
showed himself greatly moved, that one of newfangledness called [NOTE: Greek omitted but was a
dispute over the word for "a bed"] [Niceph. Calist. lib.8. cap.42.] though the difference be little or none;
and another reporteth that he was much abused for turning "Cucurbita" (to which reading the people had
been used) into "Hedera". [S. Jerome in 4. Ionae. See S. Aug: epist. 10.] Now if this happens in better
times, and upon so small occasions, we might justly fear hard censure, if generally we should make
verbal and unnecessary changings. We might also be charged (by scoffers) with some unequal dealing
towards a great number of good English words. For as it is written of a certain great Philosopher, that he
should say , that those logs were happy that were made images to be worshipped; for their fellows, as
good as they, lay for blocks behind the fire: so if we should say, as it were, unto certain words, Stand up
higher, have a place in the Bible always, and to others of like quality, Get ye hence, be banished forever,
we might be taxed peradventure with S. James his words, namely, "To be partial in ourselves and judges
of evil thoughts." Add hereunto, that niceness in words was always counted the next step to trifling, and
so was to be curious about names too: also that we cannot follow a better pattern for elocution than God
himself; therefore he using divers words, in his holy writ, and indifferently for one thing in nature: [see
Euseb. li. 12. ex Platon.] we, if we will not be superstitious, may use the same liberty in our English
versions out of Hebrew and Greek, for that copy or store that he hath given us. Lastly, we have on the
one side avoided the scrupulosity of the Puritans, who leave the old Ecclesiastical words, and betake
them to other, as when they put WASHING for BAPTISM, and CONGREGATION instead of
CHURCH: as also on the other side we have shunned the obscurity of the Papists, in their AZIMES,
TUNIKE, RATIONAL, HOLOCAUSTS, PRAEPUCE, PASCHE, and a number of such like, whereof
their late Translation is full, and that of purpose to darken the sense, that since they must needs translate
the Bible, yet by the language thereof, it may be kept from being understood. But we desire that the
Scripture may speak like itself, as in the language of Canaan, that it may be understood even of the very
vulgar.

Many other things we might give thee warning of (gentle Reader) if we had not exceeded the measure of
a Preface already. It remaineth, that we commend thee to God, and to the Spirit of his grace, which is
able to build further than we can ask or think. He removeth the scales from our eyes, the vail from our
hearts, opening our wits that we may understand his word, enlarging our hearts, yea correcting our
affections, that we may love it to the end. Ye are brought unto fountains of living water which ye digged
not; do not cast earth into them with the Philistines, neither prefer broken pits before them with the
wicked Jews. [Gen 26:15. Jer 2:13.] Others have laboured, and you may enter into their labours; O
receive not so great things in vain, O despise not so great salvation! Be not like swine to tread under foot
so precious things, neither yet like dogs to tear and abuse holy things. Say not to our Saviour with the
Gergesites, Depart out of our coast [Matt 8:34]; neither yet with Esau sell your birthright for a mess of
pottage [Heb 12:16]. If light be come into the world, love not darkness more than light; if food, if
clothing be offered, go not naked, starve not yourselves. Remember the advice of Nazianzene, "It is a
grievous thing" (or dangerous) "to neglect a great fair, and to seek to make markets afterwards:" also the
encouragement of S. Chrysostom, "It is altogether impossible, that he that is sober" (and watchful)
"should at any time be neglected:" [S. Chrysost. in epist. ad Rom. cap. 14. oral. 26.] Lastly, the
admonition and menacing of S. Augustine, "They that despise God's will inviting them, shall feel God's
will taking vengeance of them." [S. August. ad artic. sibi falso object. Artic. 16.] It is a fearful thing to
fall into the hands of the living God; [Heb 10:31] but a blessed thing it is, and will bring us to
everlasting blessedness in the end, when God speaketh unto us, to hearken; when he setteth his word
before us, to read it; when he stretcheth out his hand and calleth, to answer, Here am I, here we are to do
thy will, O God. The Lord work a care and conscience in us to know him and serve him, that we may be
acknowledged of him at the appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ, to whom with the holy Ghost, be all
praise and thanksgiving. Amen.
 THESIS ON THE PREFACE by Edgar J. Goodspeed

The following thesis by a modern manuscript scholar, now deceased, protests the omission of the
Translators’ Preface to the 1611 King James Version from King James Bibles for the past 100 years. We are
left to wonder why it has been left to a “modern” scholar to publish this compelling and legitimate
protest to the removal of the Translators’ Preface. What other book would be published without its
preface, the preliminary essay in which the author or authors explain their intentions and methods of
research, define the scope of their work and present invaluable background information to the reader?
Why is it that a modern scholar endeavored for years to restore the Translators’ Preface to the King
James Bible, but among the multitude of KJV-Only leaders who claim to defend the KJV, not one has so
much as registered a complaint about the removal of the Preface and demanded its restoration by the
publishing houses and Bible societies – nor have any of them independently published King James
Bibles which include the Preface. Neither do the so-called defenders of the 1611 King James Version
educate KJV readers as to the contents of the Translators' Preface; nor do they cite the Translators’ own
words in their defense of the KJV, but invent dishonest explanations concerning the various translation
issues. Why? We submit that inclusion of the Translators’ Preface in King James Bibles would provide
readers with invaluable facts concerning the translation of the 1611 KJV – facts that would enlighten
and protect them against the great quantity of false and misleading information that has issued forth
from the leadership of the KJV-Only movement. It is for this reason that we offer Professor Edgar J.
Goodspeed’s “Thesis on the Translators' Preface” – not as an endorsement of modern scholarship – but
to inform our readers of the ramifications of the disastrous and, we believe, deliberate suppression of the
Preface to the 1611 King James Version.
 THE TRANSLATORS TO THE READER
Preface to the King James Version 1611
Thesis by
EDGAR J. GOODSPEED

(Not Copyrighted)

PREFACE TO THE 1611 KING JAMES VERSION

No book means so much to religion as the Bible. In all its forms it has greatly served religion, and in its
modern forms its meaning comes out more clearly and more tellingly than ever. It has more to teach the
modern world about religion than even its strongest advocates have realized. Few of them have fully
explored the wealth and depth of its contribution to modern religious attitudes.

Of all the forms of the English Bible, the most distinguished and widely cherished is the King James
Version. Its value for religion is very great, and it is on that account all the more important that its origin
and place in the history of the Bible be understood, so that false ideas about it may not prevail, for in so
far as they do prevail they are likely to impair and to distort its religious usefulness.

There can be no doubt, however, that widespread and serious misapprehensions as to its origin do very
generally prevail, and that these seriously condition its religious value. The literary interest and the
liturgical value of that version are of course universally recognized. It is a classic of 16th and 17th
century English, and it is a treasure of Christian liturgy, deeply freighted with religious associations.
These are values every man of culture will at once acknowledge and approve.

It is, moreover, deeply imbedded in the affection and devotion of great groups of people, not all of them
religious. They find in it the final embodiment of moral, social, and literary values which they greatly
prize. This is in itself a fact of great importance. Even if the version were itself less eminent as an
English classic or a liturgical masterpiece the extraordinary prestige it enjoys would give it a
consequence all its own.

The tremendous significance thus generally attached to it by the public makes it imperative that the facts
as to its origin and ancestry be well known, or the most fantastic misconceptions about these matters will
arise and prevail. But these facts are not well known, and misconceptions consequently do prevail to an
amazing extent.

The King James Version is predominantly the Bible of the layman, and it will undoubtedly continue to
be so for a long time to come. This fact makes it doubly important that it be presented to him as
intelligently and as intelligibly as possible. This well-recognized fact has led its publishers through the
generations to have it tacitly revised from time to time, so that the obsolete words and spellings might
not confuse the ordinary reader. This commendable activity began immediately upon the first
publication of the version in 1611 and continued intermittently until 1769 when, under the hands of Dr.
Blayney of Oxford, it reached its present form. It has cleared the text of the version of innumerable
antique spellings, such as Hierusalem, Marie, assoone, foorth, shalbe, fet, creeple, fift, sixt, ioy, middes,
charet and the like. Comparatively few verses in the version have escaped such improvements and
modernizations, and most verses contain several such changes.
It has also corrected the numerous misprints of the version, so that it is now of the most accurately
printed books in the world. The one original misprint to survive is the famous "strain (straine) at the
gnat" in Matthew 23:24 (for "strain out a gnat"), which has so endeared itself to users of the King James
that no modern publisher has the temerity to set it right.

The omission of the Apocrypha from most modern printings of King James and the insertion of
Archbishop Ussher's chronology, which first appeared in its margins in 1701, were more serious
changes from the original King James; the chronology in particular has certainly outlived its usefulness
and, as at best a late accretion upon the version, out not to continue.

But it is the omission of the great Preface, "The Translators to the Reader," that is most to be regretted.
The makers of the version in their day felt that the work called for some explanation and defense, and
entrusted the writing of a suitable preface to Myles Smith, of Brasenose College, Oxford, afterward
Bishop of Gloucester. His Preface for many years stood at the beginning of the version. But for various
reasons -- its length, its obscurity, its controversial and academic character -- it has gradually come to be
omitted by modern publishers of the King James, which is thus made to present itself to the reader
abruptly and without explanation or introduction of any kind.

The result of this upon the hosts of ignorant and untrained people who use the version is disastrous in
the extreme. My own correspondence abounds in letters from well-meaning people who have been led
into the strangest misconceptions by its absence. It is indeed long, controversial, and pedantic, but this
very fact is significant. And with all its faults, it says some things about the version and its makers and
their aims that still greatly need to be said, indeed, that must be said, if the readers of the version are to
be given the protection and guidance that they deserve and that its makers provided for them.

For they will accept this guidance and protection from no one else. It is idle for any modern to attempt to
correct these misapprehensions; his efforts will only be resented or ignored. But if the King James Bible
itself can be shown to say to its adherents the very things they most need to know about their version, it
will be possible for them to benefit by them without embarrassment or inconsistency. All the more
necessary, it would seem, for restoring the great Preface, or at least the essential parts of it, to its rightful
place in the "Authorized Bible."

What are some of the views held by the habitual readers of the King James Bible about it? Let me
answer out of my own recent correspondence and experience, being careful not to exaggerate or distort,
but to set down only what self-constituted champions of King James have actually written over or under
their own signatures.

First of all must come the widespread belief that the King James Bible is "the original." This is probably
the prevailing impression of those who use it, but it has been most definitely and repeatedly expressed
by a distinguished journalist in his paper, the North China Daily News. In an article published in the
News in 1926 the editor steadily refers to the King James Version as "the original." We cannot doubt
that this cultivated Englishmen actually believes the King James Version to be the original English
Bible. For him the illustrious services of Bible translators and revisers from William Tyndale to
Matthew Parker simply do not exist. That these men produced 19/20ths of what now stands in the King
James Version has no force for him. Indeed, he definitely denies them and all their words when he
steadily and publicly, in print, in an editorial article in his own newspaper, describes the King James
Version over and over again as the "original."

It is no matter that you and I know that this is far from true. For these people will not give up so
cherished a view for any say-so of ours. On the contrary, it would only serve to set them more rigidly in
it. To whom then would they look with some willingness to learn? To the King James Bible itself. If its
original Preface were once more offered to them, as it was offered to the first readers of that version, and
as its makers intended it to be offered to all its readers, they could hardly refuse to listen.

And, indeed, the people who hold these fantastic ideas are not so much to blame for them as the
publishers and printers who have so steadily deprived them of the protection from such egregious
mistakes which the King James Preface so amply and ably provided. They could not have gone so
absurdly wrong if they had found in the Preface of their King James these words which the makers of
that version meant to have them find there:

"Truly (good Christian Reader) we never thought from the beginning, that we should need to make a
new Translation, nor yet to make of a bad one a good one, ... but to make a good one better, or out of
many good ones, one principal good one, not justly to be excepted against."

Not only do most readers of the King James Version suppose it to be the original English Bible; they are
actually unconscious that there is any more ultimate form of the Bible to translate or consult. A leading
layman, in one of our most intellectual communions, has told me that he always supposed the modern
translations of the Bible were made from the King James Version, and not long ago a newspaper
paragraph, with the commanding endorsement of the Associated Press, explicitly made that assertion.
The same idea appeared in the New Republic as recently as April of last year. What can save these
untrained, well-meaning people from the idea that the King James Bible is the "original"? Nothing but
the statements of its own Preface.

"If you ask what they [the Translators] had before them," says the Preface, "truly it was the Hebrew text
of the Old Testament, the Greek of the New ... If truth be to be tried by these tongues, then whence
should a Translation be made but out of them? These tongues therefore, the Scriptures we say in those
tongues, we set before us to translate, being the tongues wherein God was pleased to speak to his Church
by his Prophets and Apostles ... Neither, to be short, were we the first that fell in hand with translating
the Scripture into English, and consequently destitute of former helps, ..."

These are just the things that the modern reader of King James needs to know, and that the Translators
intended him to know. Why should they be kept from him? A few months ago the New York Times and
the Literary Digest united in offering the strange intelligence that "the King James Version was
compiled from the only six original papyri extant in 1611." What more can possibly be said?

Another widespread impression as to the King James is that it is the "Authorized" Bible. The dean of a
well-known New England divinity school recently insisted upon that designation for it, and strongly
resented the application of it of any other name. We need not go into the old vexed question of whether
or not it was ever actually authorized. For practically it certainly was so, and so regarded, being in fact
the third Authorized Bible of the English Church. The first was the Great Bible of 1539, which was
intended for church use. The second was the Bishops' Bible of 1568, and the third was the King James
of 1611. "Authorized" meant, of course, officially recognized for us in public worship, as the phrase
"Appointed to be read in Churches" shows.

But when the Convocation of Canterbury in 1870 inaugurated the revision of the English Bible, it was
definitely with a view to providing a more suitable Bible for purposes of public worship, and as a matter
of fact the English Revised Bible of 1881-85 has, we are told, actually displaced the King James in the
use of Canterbury Cathedral and Westminster Abbey.
In the Protestant Episcopal Church in America, Canon 45 provides that the lessons at the morning and
evening shall be read in the King James Bible ("which is the standard Bible of this church"), or in the
Revised Version, or in the American Standard Version.

The Roman Catholic Church in this country uses in public worship the Douay Bible. It will be seen that
the King James is far from being the Authorized Bible today.

But the tragic part of it all is that the people who still call it the "Authorized Bible" understand by that
term something very different from this. They understand it to mean DEVINELY AUTHORIZED. I
have today received a letter from a very zealous young minister in Atlantic City, definitely declaring his
belief in the verbal inspiration of the King James Version. This extraordinary view is very widely held.

Of course the Translators made no such claim; indeed, their account of their method of work fits very
poorly with such an idea:

"Neither did we think much to consult the Translators or Commentators, Chaldee, Hebrew, Syrian,
Greek, or Latin, no nor the Spanish, French, Italian, or Dutch; neither did we disdain to revise that which
we had done, and to bring back to the anvil that which we had hammered; but having and using as great
helps as were needful, and fearing no reproach for slowness, nor coveting praise for expedition, we have
at length, through the good hand of the Lord upon us, brought the work to that pass that you see."

"Some peradventure would have no variety of senses to be set in the margin, lest the authority of the
Scriptures for deciding controversies by that show of uncertainty, should somewhat be shaken. But we
hold their judgment not to be so sound in this point. ... Yet for all that it cannot be dissembled, that
partly to exercise and whet our wits, ... and lastly, that we might be forward to seek aid of our brethren
by conference, and never scorn those that be not in all respects so complete as they should be, being to
seek in many things ourselves, it hath pleased God in his divine providence, here and there to scatter
words and sentences of that difficulty and doubtfulness, ... that fearfulness would better beseem us than
confidence, and if we will resolve upon modesty with S. Augustine, .... There be many words in the
Scriptures, which be never found there but once, ... so that we cannot be helped by conference of places.
Again, there be many rare names of certain birds, beasts and precious stones, etc. ... Now in such a case,
doth not a margin do well to admonish the Reader to seek further, and not to conclude or dogmatize
upon this or that peremptorily? ... Therefore as S. Augustine saith, that variety of Translations is
profitable for the finding out of the sense of the Scriptures: so diversity of signification and sense in the
margin, where the text is not so clear, must need do good, yea, is necessary, as we are persuaded."

These candid, scholarly words of the Translators are not the words of inspired men, oracularly confident
of every word they use; they are the unmistakable words of careful, sincere scholars, well aware of the
inevitable limitations of their knowledge. The doctrine of the inspiration of the Translators was not held
by them, and it is difficult to see how it can be held by anyone who will read even this much of their
Preface.

Another prevalent notion about the King James Bible is that it is poetry. On this point Thomas Hardy
wrote in his journal, in 1918:

"By the will of God some men are born poetical. Of these some make themselves practical poets, others
are made poets by lapse of time who were hardly recognized as such. Particularly has this been the case
with the translators of the Bible. They translated into the language of their age; then the years began to
corrupt that language as spoken, and to add gray lichen to the translation; until the moderns who use the
corrupted tongue marvel at the poetry of the old words. When new they were not more than half so
poetical. So that Coverdale, Tyndale and the rest of them are as ghosts what they never were in the
flesh."

It must be clear that the men who, by making innumerable small changes in the text of the Bishops'
Bible, produced the King James Version were poets, if at all, only in the most attenuated sense of the
word. It is not thus that poems are made.

But if anyone had any doubt remaining as to the justice of Thomas Hardy's judgment, it must
unquestionably evaporate in the presence of the Preface. The Translators who there emerge are much
closer to pedants than to poets. "They came or were thought to come to the work, not exercendi causa
(as one saith) but exercitati, that is, learned, not to learn; ... Therefore such were thought upon as could
say modestly with Saint Jerome, .... Both we have learned the Hebrew tongue in part, and in the Latin
we have been exercised almost from our very cradle."

Their aim was not poetry but clearness: "But we desire that the Scripture may speak like itself, ... that it
may be understood even by the very vulgar."

But of course the greatest illusion about the King James Bible is that it is the sole, unique, divine Bible,
untouched by human hands. This doctrine, grotesque as it is, is actually held as a matter of course by the
vast majority of people. The publication of any preface from the Translators to the Reader would, by its
very presence, whatever its contents, do much to remedy this. The superstitious veneration with which
some very pious people regard it would be corrected by the reprinting of the Preface.

But not the pious alone. Many editors, novelists, and professors cherish views about the version that are
simply slightly rationalized forms of the same notion. Sentimental statements about it in current books
and papers that its translators "went about their work in the spirit of little children," or that "it is a finer
and nobler literature than the Scriptures in their original tongues," are but survivals of the old dogma of
uniqueness, so explicitly disclaimed in the Preface:

"... we are so far off from condemning any of their labors that travelled before us in this kind, either in
this land or beyond sea, ... that we acknowledge them to have been raised up by God, ... and that they
deserve to be had of us and of posterity, in everlasting remembrance. ... Yet for all that, as nothing is
begun and perfected at the same time, and the later thoughts are thought to be the wiser; so, if we
building upon their foundation that went before us, and being helped by their labors, do endeavor to
make that better which they left so good; no man, we are sure, hath cause to mislike us; they, we
persuade ourselves, if they were alive, would thank us."

These great sentences, are well worth reproducing today. I have ventured to lay before the leading
publishers of the King James Bible the duty of restoring the great Preface to its rightful place, at the
beginning of it. They have courteously replied, giving various reasons for continuing to omit it. Let us
examine these one by one.

The first reason is that it is too academic. But this does not justify them in omitting it. If they will let
their readers know even this about the origin of the version, it will save them from grievous error. The
King James revisers were university professors and scholars. They were an academic group. Why
withhold this fact from their readers, especially if silence on this point is leading to such dire
consequences?

One of the most unfortunate things about the adherents of the King James Version is their antipathy to
scholars. They regard them with grave suspicion. Yet their own version is the masterpiece of biblical
scholarship in Jacobean England. If the Preface reveals no more to them than this, it would be worth
printing, for it is precisely this rift between piety and learning that is most dangerous to the church. As a
matter of fact, we owe the English Bible to university men, from the sixteenth century to the twentieth.
It could hardly be otherwise. But today, not one reader of King James in ten thousand even dreams that
any biblical scholar had anything to do with his English Bible.

The argument of the publishers that the Preface is controversial is also nugatory. The version sprang out
of controversy; the Preface reflects the fact; why conceal it? The hushing of the controversy in the
history of Christianity does not make for intelligence. The New Testament itself sprang, much of it, out
of controversy; I and II Corinthians, for instance. It is precisely this muting that has produced the
impression that the version originated in some other, better world than ours. If the Preface shows its
human background, let us have it, since it is a part of the truth.

The Translators were well aware that their work would have to encounter strong opposition:

"Zeal to promote the common good, whether it be by devising any thing ourselves, or revising that
which hath been labored by others, deserves certainly much respect and esteem, but yet finding but cold
entertainment in the world. ... For he that meddles with men's Religion in any part, meddles with their
customs, nay, with their freehold, and though they find no content in that which they have, yet they
cannot abide to hear of altering [it]. ... Many men's mouths have been open a good while (and yet are not
stopped) with speeches about the Translation so long in hand, or rather perusals of Translations made
before: and ask what may be the reason, what the necessity of the employment: Hath the Church been
deceived, say they, all this while? ... Was their Translation good before? Why do they now mend it?
Was it not good? Why then was it obtruded to the people? ..."

Without these trenchant sentences, people are left with the impression that the King James translation
descended like the gentle dew from heaven, amidst universal acclaim. The silencing of the controversial
note of the Preface puts a false face upon the version, for which its original makers are not to blame.

A third objection raised by the publishers to restoring the Preface is its obscurity, and the confusion it
would create, in the mind of the ordinary reader. If this confusion means that the reader would be made
aware that there had been and might be other versions of the Bible, it might better be called clarification.
Confusion is the ordinary reader's present condition of mind, as I have tried to show. Left without the
translator's guidance, he now believes the King James to be the "original" divinely inspired, unique, not
made with hands, final, and definitive. To break in upon this false assurance with the clear statements of
the Preface may produce a temporary confusion, but the confusion will be due to the disastrous practice
of omitting the Preface, not to the healthful one of including it.

As for obscurity, is the Preface any more obscure than the version it introduced? This is the strangest of
all reasons for the King James printers to adduce, yet I have it before me in writing from one of the
greatest of them.

"The words of the wise are as goads, and as nails fastened by the masters of assemblies, which are given
from one shepherd." - Ecclesiastes 12:11

So reads the King James Version. Is there anything in the Preface that approaches this in obscurity? Yet
publishers justify the omission of the Preface on the ground that it is "obscure." There is not a sentence
in it as obscure as this one, or as hosts of others in the King James Version. No, if obscurity is the
criterion, the publishers might have omitted the version and printed the Preface, but hardly the other
way. It must be that the publishers are quite unaware of the marked obscurity of great areas of their own
version.

A recent advocate of the King James Version says of the English Bible: "Much of the writing is inferior.
.... Whole sections of the historical narratives are written in an immature and inferior manner. ... Some
of the prophets have only a single verse that arrests attention. Only occasionally did Paul reveal his
tremendous capacity to express thought in a memorable manner?" What does this mean, but that the
writer does not understand his version? The simple truth is, the obscurity of the King James Version is
its outstanding trait. When a man says things like this about Paul and the prophets, he is indicating, not
the Bible at all, but his version of it. He reveals the fact that he is using a version he cannot understand.

It may require some patience for the modern reader to peruse the King James Preface. But think of the
patience he is called upon to exhibit in reading long obscure areas of Paul and the prophets! He is by no
means unaccustomed to reading his Bible in the midst of obscurity. And it is an admirable idea to have a
genuine piece of first class Jacobean prose before him, side by side with the Jacobean revision, to show
him how these revisers actually wrote when not translating but expressing their own thoughts. Here their
real literary standards appear, in an authentic sample. If to their modern publishers their style appears
obscure, it may in part explain the greater obscurity of their version. And at all events, it shows how they
thought one should write. This affords their readers an example of what they considered clear and
forceful English, and the value of this to any serious reader of King James, as a measuring rod, a
standard of style, is unmistakable. Anyone who can understand the Preface can understand the version.

Especially for students, the Preface, with its wealth of contemporary materials and attitudes, is
indispensable. In a humanities survey course for college Freshmen, a western university recently
purchased 43 copies of the King James Bible without the Preface. In no other field of study would such
a course have been dreamed of. To approach that version historically, and as any student should, without
the Preface, is simply impossible. What has been said of the importance of the Preface to the general
reader is even more true of the student, and it is high time our teachers of the English Bible in colleges
awoke to the fact. But how can they be expected to awaken to it, when very few of them have ever seen
a Bible containing the Preface? For the past hundred years, from the point of view of everyone --
ministers, professors, students, general readers, pious readers -- the Preface has been virtually
suppressed.

The chief edition of the Bible containing it since 1821 is the English royal quarto, published by the
Oxford University Press. This is an expensive pulpit Bible, seldom seen in America, which we cannot
expect colleges to place in quantities in their reading rooms. On the other hand, the British and Foreign
Bible Society and the American Bible Society seem never to have included the Preface in their Bibles at
all. It has been included in only two other printings of the Bible, so far as I can learn, in the past hundred
years.

It is true, it has more than once been published in books about the Bible. J.R. Dore, at the special request
of Christopher Wordsworth, Bishop of Lincoln, introduced the Preface as an appendix into the second
edition of his OLD BIBLES; and A.W. Pollard, in his RECORDS OF THE ENGLISH BIBLE, reprinted
it in full. "This preface," said Richard Lovett (The Printed English Bible), "most unhappily long ago
ceased to form a part of the ordinary editions." "It is to be regretted," wrote John Stoughton (Our English
Bible), "that while the dedication appears in all the editions, the address to the readers is inserted in very
few. It would be good alteration to cancel the former and universally introduce the latter."

This is no idle demand of a few savants and specialists, in the interests of mere erudition, but a crying
need of present-day religion, of which the King James Bible is undeniably still the chief stay. That that
edition should continue to sink into greater and greater misconception and misrepresentation, when
much of it might be prevented by the simple and obvious device of restoring the Preface, is intolerable.
That version is too deeply freighted with religious values to be left at the mercy of every charlatan to
exploit. Its Preface is a great monument of sound biblical learning and method. Its readers need it as they
have never needed it before. It lies ready to our hands, enfolding in itself the very correctives modern
vagaries about the King James Bible so sadly need.

It is not enough that it is somewhere available in public libraries, in books about the Bible. Who knows
about these books? I have had letters and inquiries from intelligent, educated ministers, asking where the
Preface can be found. They had never heard of it. What chance, then, has the ordinary reader to know of
it or find his way to it? The King James Version is a tremendous force in the modern world, very potent
for good if it be intelligently used, but for evil if it be left unexplained. What most of its readers chiefly
need is education about it, and that is precisely what its Preface provides.

For my part, I know of no greater service that can be done to biblical study today than to put back the
King James Preface into its rightful place, in every copy of that great version, to the understanding of
which it is so indispensable.

The English university presses, which have been since the days of Charles I among the great printers of
the King James Version, used to carry a separate printing of the Preface for free distribution to those
who asked for it. But this supply is now exhausted. The Preface is practically out of print. The great
version, in its day a monument of enlightened learning, is left defenseless, to the inevitable confusion of
all its readers.

Sound learning and common sense alike demand the reprinting of the Preface. It is essential to any real
understanding of the King James Version. This has at length been made possible through the liberality
of Charles Forrest Cutter, Esq., a generous friend of the Bible in all its forms. The Oxford and
Cambridge presses have given their consent to the reprinting, and the Huntington Library has permitted
us to publish the text in facsimile from the Bridgewater copy of the first printing of 1611 in its
collection. We are particularly happy to do this (with the spellings somewhat modernized) in 1935, the
400th anniversary of the first printed English Bible (by Myles Coverdale) of which the King James
Bible is the most illustrious descendant.

To me, of course, the religious values of the Bible far outweigh any mere literary considerations. It has
great messages which the modern world greatly needs. To obscure these messages in phraseology which
may once have conveyed them but is now so quaint and antique as to belong to the museums of
literature, seems to me a very shocking and tragic business. It is like denying a very sick man the
medical aid of today and giving him instead the treatment of the 16th century, because it is so
picturesque! It is like insisting upon cupping him and bleeding him, at the risk of his health and even his
life.

But even to those who take the Bible less seriously -- to the dogmatist and the dilettante -- it must be
clear that the King James Preface belongs at the beginning of the King James Bible, where its makers
put it and meant it to remain; and that the reasons advanced by its publishers for omitting it are really
very cogent reasons for restoring it to its rightful place.

/s/ Edgar J. Goodspeed

Meredith Publications
1030 South Santa Anita Avenue, Arcadia, California
 Addendum
* * * * * * * * * FOOTNOTE * * * * * * * * *

This concludes the Preface of the 1611 Authorized Version

which was from the Translators and set to hand by:

Myles Smith of Brasenose College in Oxford

(who later became the Bishop of Gloucester.)

This version of the 1611 Preface with the spelling somewhat modernized was printed as an appendix in
1935, the 400th anniversary of the first printed English Bible, that by Myles Coverdale, of which the
King James Bible is the most illustrious descendant.

The Preface can also be found in the editions since 1821 of the English royal quarto, published by the
Oxford University Press, an expensive pulpit Bible. It can also be found in full in A.W. Pollard's
RECORDS OF THE ENGLISH BIBLE and as an appendix in J.R. Dore's OLD BIBLES, 2nd edition.

It is a shame that neither the British and Foreign Bible Society or the American Bible Society has never
seem willing to include the Preface (or an abbreviated form thereof) in their Bibles for the last one
hundred (plus) years.

It is also available from the Oxford and Cambridge presses and the original can be found in the
Huntington Library as the Bridgewater collection of the first printing of the 1611.

Typed by Antonio F. Partigianoni, 101 Nelda Dr., Leesville, LA 71446 (318) 239-7613, from a booklet
edited by Edgar J. Goodspeed, THE TRANSLATORS TO THE READER, Preface to the King James
Version 1611, Univ. of Chicago Press, Chicago, and reprinted by Meredith Publications, 1030 South
Santa Anita Ave., Arcadia, CA. ($1 per copy eons ago). This booklet contains an lengthy plea and
justification by E.J. Goodspeed for replacing the Preface into all future printings of the KJV, the
modernized version from the Coverdale 400th anniversity appendix and photocopy of the original plates
of the Huntington Library original 1611 Preface.

I have done my best to faithfully transcribe the Preface and elected to include footnotes and comments
in brackets within the text due to constraints of ascii printing. I did not use an indented left margin
should someone want to use another word processor to read or reprint it. Both the KJV modernized
version of the Preface and Goodspeed's thesis can be downloaded as 1611-KJV.ZIP from the better
BBSes.

Hopefully, others will be good enough to send this along to other networks and BBSes. With the help of
Eric Gray from Tucson who has a full-page scanner, I will soon be able to upload a copy of the original
plates of the 1611 Preface in the Old English. So, be on the lookout for KJVPCX-01.ZIP to KJVPCX-xx
where "xx" is the number of files required to upload the PCX formatted files honoring the normal 360k
file size restriction.

Ciao and God bless,

Tony

Source: Christian Classics Ethereal Library